That would probably end up being a higher move count than oll/pll, harder recognition, and less ergonomic. I don't really like shooting down ideas but a better way to do that would be force a pi/H case zbll while inserting last pair and already have all edges oriented.
I got a solve under 40 moves with a more advanced version of that beginner's method I posted. I can't reconstruct because it was a hand scramble but that shows it really might have potential
steps I used: build 2 pairs where one side color and the end colors match, put them together into a...
Here's a beginner's method I thought of
1 - make a 2x2x3 block
1a - 3/4 cross
1b - expand into 1x2x3 block
1c - fill in last 2 edges
2 - fill in last two pairs and ignore last cross piece
2a - make one pair
2b - make second pair while preserving the first one
2c - put both pairs in their...
Okay I made a method a couple days ago and it seems to be pretty decent. It's kind of a ripoff of Thistlethwaite but that's not what I was going for, plus the solve feels a lot different. It was actually based more on Guimond and SSC.
1. orient all edges
2. blockbuild f2l-1slot so that UD...
I want to share the methods that I use on here just because I haven't seen quite the same methods used anywhere.
For 3x3 the steps to my method are thus:
- Solve f2l-1 and eo in any way. This takes most of the solve and is very intuitive. Most of the time it is primarily blockbuilding with...
Isn't this simply less efficient than CFOP which is already only good because of easy look-ahead? You're just increasing move count needlessly. CFOP already has a pretty bad move count for a speedcubing method but you almost doubled it. While I understand the general sentiment, learning and...